Apple Macbook Pro faulty after three repairs

diecianni

Hi

I'm currently in a back and forth with AppleCare regarding my Macbook Pro, which I purchased in 2012. I also purchased AppleCare for £279, which is due to expire in November. At that point, I'll have had the machine for three years.

I've had three repairs on the machine so far. I've had the screen replaced twice, within a couple of weeks of one another, and then the bottom case replaced (a screw hadn't been tightened properly and came loose, scratching the bottom case in transit).

I've been offered a fourth repair, after which Apple said they would seek to replace my laptop if the problem persisted. Given that I keep having issues with the screen, I requested a replacement rather than a fourth repair. My argument is that in the three years I've had the laptop, it has rarely worked the way I would've expected.

After doing some reading on Apple's own website about consumer law/SOGA, I decided to pursue that route instead, and request a replacement. Apple obliged, and have arranged an independent, Apple certified technician to have a look at the machine and decide whether the fault was caused by misuse.

I now want to know whether it will be feasible, if the results come back in my favour, for Apple to replace my MacBook rather than repair it again. I've had to go back and forth to the Apple store multiple times with this laptop, and as a result have spent almost a month without a machine, so I don't think it's unfair for me to say enough is enough. Where do I stand legally in this matter?

Any input or advice is appreciated.

Kind regards

wealdroam

diecianni wrote: »

Hi

I'm currently in a back and forth with AppleCare regarding my Macbook Pro, which I purchased in 2012. I also purchased AppleCare for £279, which is due to expire in November. At that point, I'll have had the machine for three years.

I've had three repairs on the machine so far. I've had the screen replaced twice, within a couple of weeks of one another, and then the bottom case replaced (a screw hadn't been tightened properly and came loose, scratching the bottom case in transit).

I've been offered a fourth repair, after which Apple said they would seek to replace my laptop if the problem persisted. Given that I keep having issues with the screen, I requested a replacement rather than a fourth repair. My argument is that in the three years I've had the laptop, it has rarely worked the way I would've expected.

After doing some reading on Apple's own website about consumer law/SOGA, I decided to pursue that route instead, and request a replacement. Apple obliged, and have arranged an independent, Apple certified technician to have a look at the machine and decide whether the fault was caused by misuse.

I now want to know whether it will be feasible, if the results come back in my favour, for Apple to replace my MacBook rather than repair it again. I've had to go back and forth to the Apple store multiple times with this laptop, and as a result have spent almost a month without a machine, so I don't think it's unfair for me to say enough is enough. Where do I stand legally in this matter?

Any input or advice is appreciated.

Kind regards

When doing your research into SoGA you will have seen that it is for you to prove that the goods were faulty at the time of sale. It does seem however that Apple are going to do that for you.

Having decided that the thing is inherently faulty, the seller, you haven't said that you bought the laptop directly from Apple, must provide a remedy. That remedy could be either a replacement, repair or refund. You can express your preference, but you cannot insist on a disproportionate remedy.

So effectively the seller chooses the most cost effective remedy. If a refund is decided upon, that can be reduced to take account of the three years use you have had.

I hope that helps.

diecianni

Thanks for the quick reply!

I did purchase the laptop from Apple, yes. And Apple have arranged for an independent technician to 'prove' that the fault is inherent.

From Apple's website:

A consumer is also entitled to withdraw from the contract by returning the product in exchange for a full refund if the consumer rejects the goods within 30 days or if the product does not conform with the contract after one repair or replacement.

Since I've had three repairs, does this not mean that I have the right to withdraw from the contract? I don't want a full refund, though. I just want a replacement laptop.

Any ideas?

unholyangel

The section you are quoting (about 30 days to reject and one repair being allowed) comes from the Consumer Rights Act - which only applies to contracts of sale entered into on or after the 1st October 2015.

Given you purchased yours 3 years ago, that would be the Sale Of Goods Act which was in force then and there is no limit to the number of repairs they can carry out - providing they are done within a reasonable time and without causing significant inconvenience.

After 3 years, it would be extremely unusual for a retailer to give a full refund, you'd more than likely be looking at around a 30-60% refund. While you can request a replacement, the retailer can refuse if this would be disproportionately costly in comparison to another remedy (ie partial refund).

diecianni

I've just had an email back from the AppleCare senior advisor dealing with my case. I asked them if it would be possible for a replacement, rather than a repair, if the technician's verdict is in my favour.

Their reply was: "If the technician thinks that a consumer law claim is viable, your machine will be replaced".

Now that I have that in writing, my question is: What constitutes a "viable" consumer law claim? The fault developed without any physical damage to the machine. This the second replacement screen installed by Apple at one of their stores.

wealdroam

diecianni wrote: »

Now that I have that in writing, my question is: What constitutes a "viable" consumer law claim?

You really need to ask them what they mean by using the word "viable", but my interpretation of that is that if they determine that the goods are inherently faulty, and thus a SoGA remedy is required.

But then again, it is possible they are using the term "viable" in reference to the new Consumer Rights Act, which, as Unholyangel says, isn't applicable.

ncmurray

I was wondering how the OP got on with this?

In my experience, Apple have had excellent customer service. I have an iPhone 6, and it has been replaced twice, after issues couldn't be resolved over the phone.

diecianni

Hi,

Still ongoing. I'm waiting for a response from Apple today, so will update.

ncmurray

Thanks, Diecianni. I hope it is resolved to your satisfaction

diecianni

Hi

So I had an email from Apple, where the senior advisor explained to me that the technicians had found a fault eligible for a consumer law claim, but that they would only offer me a repair.

I replied to say that I wasn't satisfied with a repair, and that according to Apple's website I was within my rights to request a replacement. I also referenced the fact that the advisor had told me I'd be given a replacement of a viable consumer law claim was found.

I was pretty convinced I wasn't going to get anywhere with this, which was frustrating given the drawn out process. I got a call from a different senior advisor at about 7pm that evening. He was very matter of fact and to the point, and told me that they would be replacing my machine.

Even though my machine is mid-2012, I am receiving the top specification mid-2015 model and am being refunded an amount to cover the remaining AppleCare on my old machine. Apple are taking care of delivery and return of my old machine, and allowing me to transfer data between the two in between.

So there you have it, Apple's excellent customer service once again proving it's worth. If you genuinely believe you have a case, stand your ground and Apple's advisors will usually respect that.